ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2021
Field validity and spatial accuracy of Food Standards Agency Food Hygiene Rating scheme data for England.
Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying online only delivery food outlets in the North of England using data from food delivery apps.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Observational
- Characterizing the food environment in Scotland and its association with deprivation: A national study.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Planning policies to restrict fast food and inequalities in child weight in England: a quasi-experimental analysis.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2024Article
- A mixed-method systematic review and meta-analysis of the influences of food environments and food insecurity on obesity in high-income countries.Food science & nutrition · 2022Article
- Automatic classification of takeaway food outlet cuisine type using machine (deep) learning.Machine learning with applications · 2021Article
- The impact of school exclusion zone planning guidance on the number and type of food outlets in an English local authority: A longitudinal analysis.Health & place · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe study aimed to evaluate the validity and spatial accuracy of the Food Standards Agency Food Hygiene Rating online data through a field audit.
methodsA field audit was conducted in five Lower Layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs) in the North East of England. LSOAs were purposively selected from the top and bottom quintiles of the Index of Multiple Deprivation and from urban and rural areas. The FHRS data validity against the field data was measured as Positive Predictive Values (PPV) and sensitivity. Spatial accuracy was evaluated via mean difference in straight line distances between the FHRS coordinates and the field coordinates.
resultsIn all, 182 premises were present in the field, of which 162 were in the FHRS data giving a sensitivity of 89%. Eight outlets recorded in the FHRS data were absent in the field, giving a PPV of 95%.The mean difference in the geographical coordinates of the field audit compared to the FHRS was 110 m, and <100 m for 77% of outlets.
conclusionsAfter an evaluation of the validity and spatial accuracy of the FHRS data, the results suggest that it is a useful dataset for surveillance of the food environment and for intervention evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.